The days of treating energy consultant Carter Page as the most laughable member of Trump’s campaign team have come to a solid middle, as Page’s jaw-dropping testimony before the House Intelligence Committee reveals the signature brilliance of Trump’s foreign policy adviser.
“I greatly appreciate the opportunity to help set the record straight … following the false evidence, other illegal activities as well as additional extensive lies distributed by the Clinton campaign and their transnational associates. Working in coordination with the Obama administration, their transnational criminal associates, which severely defamed me and many other supporters of the Trump campaign and our democracy in general should hopefully soon gain full exposure.”
No, it’s not all like that. That’s the coherent part, the part that Page had a chance to write in advance. Page’s testimony is peppered with denunciations of the “Clinton/Obama regime” and the many “U.S. cyber operations of wiretap” against him. Even better are the sections where Carter Page plays attorney.
“Whereas I have never done anything wrong in Russia, no documents, records, electronically stored information including email, communication, recordings, data and tangible things could reasonably lead to the discovery of any facts within the investigation’s publicly announced parameters as it relates to actions by the Russian government.”
Which fits perfectly with this …
Mr. Schiff: Dr. Page, my question is whether you complied with the subpoena that required you to produce all relevant documents to the committee. Did you comply?
Mr. Page: I pleaded my Fifth Amendment rights, yes.
Because nothing says no document could reasonably lead to anything wrong like refusing to hand over documents. Though how Page gets to his decision to withhold some documents is … pretty amazing.
And really, you have to look below to see the visual aid that Page brought to the committee.
Carter Page provided to the Congress this handy guide to how the Clinton/Obama regime and their transnational cronies corrupted the nation and damaged the lives of good men … like Carter Page.
The discussion between Page and Schiff on how Page, who refused representation by an attorney and was determined to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights when it comes to turning over documents, includes some of the most amazing legal discussion since Madison v. Brown v. Roe v. Reality.
Mr. Schiff: This is the first that the minority counsel is learning this. You pleaded your Fifth Amendment rights not to produce documents to the committee?
Mr. Page: I — I have severe concern that there is a — the information that was illegally wiretapped, and hacked from my computer, it will not — by definition, I’m a little guy with limited technical resources. It cannot be as comprehensive as the information that was already illegally collected against me.
If the many many possible implications of that don’t sink in right away, don’t worry. Schiff spends two more pages of transcript just trying to get Page to say something that the rest of the world can comprehend. With the eventual point being that Page is willing to hand over some things—as long as he’s sure they can’t hurt him. Which leads Adam Schiff to this staggering revelation.
Mr. Schiff: Is it your position that you have a Fifth Amendment right to provide non-incriminating documents or emails to the committee, but withhold incriminating documents from the committee and selectively comply with the subpoena?
Mr. Page: I — there are no incriminating — nothing I have done is incriminating or even unethical in any way. The only thing — the only thing that —
Mr. Schiff: Dr. Page, if nothing you have is incriminating, then what is the basis of your invoking your Fifth Amendment right?
You might think that would get an answer. But two more pages of transcript later, you would be wrong.
If you wondered how questioning anyone could turn into a seven-hour marathon resulting in a novel-length transcript, check another sample Page response.
Mr. Schiff: And how much interaction did you have with George Papadopoulos?
Mr. Page: Very limited. Very limited. I cannot — I think the last time I saw him was somewhere in the range of June 2016, you know. And again, he was on some email chains at the very beginning. My — to the best of my recollection, I don’t recall him, for whatever reason, you know — probably the most interaction I had — or that he had with our team was, in terms of our, you know — of the informal group, was in the first — so I believe that Washington Post report came out in March. It was kind of nothing beyond April of 2016. Again, he may have showed up.
It takes two more pages of testimony like this for Schiff to drag from Page some responses which can be assembled as: He attended a dinner meeting with both Papadopoulos and Sessions in June, during which Page informed Sessions that he was going to Moscow. Every bit of it is as painful as the above. For example …
Mr. Schiff: And what did you tell him about your trip to Moscow?
Mr. Page: I just mentioned, I’m — you know, originally I was trying to get a lot of work done prior to my trip because I knew I’d be traveling over the coming weeks, but I’m glad to have had the opportunity — that was the only time I ever met him. I said: I’m glad to have the opportunity to meet you. And I just — I’m going to be traveling, but I will — I’m going to give a — you know, totally unrelated to the campaign, I’m going to give a brief — or a speech, in Moscow.
Mr. Schiff: If it was totally unrelated to the campaign, Dr. Page, why did you use the limited time you had to talk with the now Attorney General to tell him you were going to Moscow.
Mr. Page: It was in the context of saying, because I have — I’m travelling. You know, it’s like discussing your travel schedule. Just walking — I was right at the end of the dinner walking out the door, saying, I’m glad I was able to, you know — because it was a last minute thing where we got together, and I just mentioned it to him in passing.
Page later said he headed for Moscow three days later, which would actually put his meeting with Papadopoulos and Sessions in July.
Later, after Page takes the time to explain to the committee why his book was never published because of the anti-Soviet Union prejudice of publishers, we move on eventually to this tidbit …
Mr. Conaway: Okay. Who paid for your travel costs to go to Russia and back?
Mr. Page: The university just paid for the basic travel costs. I was paid zero dollars for my actual —
The university in this case would be the Moscow’s New Economic School. And after going past this charming exchange:
Mr. Shiff: Was it this speech, though, that was portrayed as condemning the United States policy for being hypocritical?
Mr. Page: Mischaracterized. They picked out the one —
Mr. Schiff: Did you use the word “hypocritical” in your speech?
Mr. Page: Can you please repeat your question?
Mr. Schiff: Did you use the word “hypocritical” in your speech?
Mr. Page: Can you say the full sentence?
Mr. Schiff: Did you use the word “hypocritical” in your speech?
And such mind-twisting statements as this …
Mr. Shiff: And what, to the best of your recollection, did the email say?
Mr. Page: The best of my recollection is what’s in the Tom hamburger article from two months ago in the Washington Post. And frankly, I don’t even recall what that is now.
Carter Page gets around to confirming one of the instances recorded in the Steele dossier—one of those moments he spent his whole opening statement criticizing.
Mr. Schiff: Well Mr. Steele alleged in the dossier you had a meeting with someone from the Presidential administration, correct?
Mr. Page: Yes, which is even more ridiculous.
Mr. Schiff: And yet, in your emails to the campaign, you said you said you had discussions with people from the Presidential administration, did you not?
Mr. Page: Again, in passing. But there was — there was — the person that was named in the dodgy dossier, not only had I never heard the person’s name, the people asked —
Mr. Schiff: And who were the persons from the Presidential administration that you had discussions with while you were in Moscow? Who were you referring to?
Mr. Page: The main person was, you know, a brief, less-than-ten-second chat with Arkady Dvorkovich.
Arkady Dvorkovich is the deputy prime minister of Russia. Page’s emails to the campaign hinted at a good deal more than a “less-than-ten-second” discussion, saying that he and Dvorkovich had a “private conversation” and that Page gained important insights.
The entire 243-page transcript contains slightly fewer Russian names than The Brothers Karamazov. Slightly. And also slightly less sense than a conceptual model of a Thomas Pynchon novel painted by Jackson Pollock.
To recap …
- Carter Page took a trip to Moscow, paid for by a Russian university, and gave a pair of speeches critical of U.S. policy which were attended by a number of Russian politicians, including the deputy prime minister.
- Before going on the trip, Page met with Jefferson Sessions and George Papadopoulos and spoke about his upcoming visit to Moscow.
- Page emailed multiple people in the campaign, including Hope Hicks and Corey Lewandoski, to let them know about the Moscow trip.
- Page discussed the trip with Sam Clovis, the co-chair of the Trump campaign who was on the receiving end of multiple emails from George Papadopoulos about setting up a meeting between Trump and Putin. It was Clovis who encouraged Papadopoulos to continue working to make connections with Russia. Page had discussions with Clovis both before going to Moscow, and after.
- Inspired by a Trump tweet, Page sent an email to the campaign suggesting that Trump take his place on the Moscow trip.
- Following the trip, Page checked in with the Trump campaign to let them know he’d had talks with both members of Putin’s administration and met members of the Duma.
- Page met with Clovis at the RNC following his trip to Russia and discussed the trip.
- Page also met with Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at the RNC—possibly about sanctions.
- Questions from the committee were enough to make it clear that Page’s email to the Trump campaign mentioned that he’d had a “private conversation” with Dvorkovich.
- Page also spends some time in emails and discussions with the campaign talking about a using a redacted communication tool that is almost certainly Snapchat to secure a conversation, and coming up with some “I can’t talk, I’m in public” signals. Because … master spy.
Many of these points aligned with the contents of what Page insisted on referring to as the “dodgy dossier,” which Page rails against at every opportunity. Which is only to be expected. Because the one thing made clear by Carter Page’s testimony is that the last person you want on your side—in anything—is Carter Page.